1st International Congress of Numanities ICoN 2014June, 2 - june 7The Role of Humanities in Contemporary Society, Semiotics, Culture, Technologies.

- A philosophical introduction to Dario Martinelli's :"A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics :: People, Paths, Ideas", DOI: 1 0.1007/978-90-481-9249-6 , 2010. -Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2010,

by Carl Christian Glosemeyer Andersen, Mag.art/PhD, UiO, Norway.Lecturer at Nansenskolen - The Humanistic Academy of Norway -

Let me explain what I have in mind with my title "A philosophical introduction ...".When I in the year 2013 discovered Dario Martinelli's "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics", 2010, I was very surprised and happy.For the first time I discovered a researcher and semiotician who was thinking in the same spheres of interest which I myself have been philosophically occupied with since the early 70's.In 1972 I was responsible for establishing ecology and eco-philosophy as a main discipline at Nansenskolen - The Humanistic Academy of Norway -.Since then, my philosophical project has been an ongoing attempt to reconcile the various research disciplines in the humanities, psychology, social sciences and natural science to a main ecology of mind- perspective.(no.66).Donald R. Griffin’s cognitive ethology, Carl Gustav Jung's psychology(no.33), George Herbert Mead's "Mind, Self and Society"(no.18,19,20)) and Gregory Bateson's "ecology of mind"(no.34,67) should form the basis for an eco-semiotic approach to the "world", understood as an eco-mental, semiotic system.It is from such a philosophical background I read Dario Martinelli's book.My main concern is to find, and then pursue, a common thread that ties the book's various themes and dispositions together into an overarching philosophical perspective on animals and humans, culture and nature.

There has been a revolution in our way of understanding and conduct research on animals behavior and their cognitive abilities. It is an ongoing revolution in the past 25 years primarily due to the life-giving combination of ethology, cognitive psychology and zoosemiotics into a unified research branch.[note (1)]Dario Martinelli's "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics", 2010, is an excellent example of what has happened and happens in research right now.

Martinellis's book is the first of its kind that wants to provide a representation of the part of semiotics known as "zoosemiotics", the study of animal communication systems. Zoosemiotics has tasked to study "semiosis" within living zoo-biological systems which means

"how signs are constructed, organized, assembled, distinguished, interpreted, codified and so forth."

Martinelli emphasizes that zoosemiotics, unlike biosemiotics, has deliberately limited its field of research to the scientific ethological study of animals "Umwelt"(no.3),understood as "a subjectively experienced animal world and their behaviour within the framework of signs and symbol exchange of gestures (semiosis)". (No.59,60,61,62,79).The exploration of other animal species' Umwelt offers of-course on a number of practical scientific, theoretical and philosophical issues. As Martinelli puts it, the problem is "to investigate the possibility of adapting almost objective perspective towards phenomenon that are by nature subjective". Have we any chance to know what "the other" can feel and think? This is an issue that almost seems insurmountable, at least when it comes to research on other species than ourselves.Martinelli would primarily make use of the analogy method: We can understand the behaviour and subjective Umwelt of other animals based on what we know about ourselves:

"I perceive my mind, from the inside, only through external ways. (...) In other words a primary status of "their" and "our" life is the perception of the animated body ".

This is a clear pragmatistic, philosophical choice, a choice that otherwise is developed within the so-called cognitive sciences. Moreover, advances in brain physiology in recent years made it possible to conduct studies directly on and in animals' sensory organs, - "Merkwelt "- , and not only in the" Wirkwelt ", which is the way animals act and behave. (no.59).

For Martinelli human culture should constitute a key research area and have to be central within zoosemiotics. According to the author bio semiotics has completely omitted human related issues, with the result that "culture" is perceived as a purely human concept.In this way the human being and the humanity will stay on o n e side of a demarcation line, while all the other animals will find themselves on the other.

A major concern in Martinelli's "Companion" is to explore the prevalent forms of reductionist tendencies in animal research and to investigate some of the key consequences that would follow in the wake of dealing with bombastic dichotomies between man and animal in research. Such "prejudices" will all could lead to a distinct form of extreme anthropocentrism where research can easily get the wrong path and lead to large negative ethical and moral consequences. Martinelli displays a refreshing philosophical and ethical approach to his field of study, rather than a purely descriptive.

I understand Dario Martinelli's critical project as an important form of deconstruction of our "grand stories". Their main functions are to sustain and continue our dominant prejudices in culture as a priori fundamental truths. An example: When John Deely, a leading philosopher and semiotician, talks about the "Semiotic Animal "(2010), this label for him is only intended to apply to man and man alone. Martinelli, however, will not make any absolute qualitative distinction between the human animal and other animal species. He maintains the idea of a Darwinian gradualism, where there are but "degrees" of differences between humans and other animals, rather than categorical qualitative ones. (no.57,58).The emergent, qualitative differences we see in nature are controlled by digital distinctions, but the processes taking place in nature itself are but gradualistic and analogue, Martinelli claims. Being able to see homo sapiens as the last emergent supplementation in a continuous evolutionary process, doesn't prevent us, in other words, at the same time to be able to see and focus on man as a specific and unique being, considered on its own terms. But then this perspective also applies to all other animal species, each in particular having their very specific,unique skills and talents that make each species fit in the art of survival.

Is "culture" something that is unique to man alone? Martinelli finds strong indicia in modern biology that all support his claim: "Culture" is not only reserved man. (no.58).Great Apes by the way transfer their acquired knowledge on to the subsequent generation. They work together, learn from each other and can form tools that they use as instruments. And - how would you understand and interpret the complex social interactions and communication that maintain the honey bee society?(no.16,44,45)

Dario Martinelli's book is in my opinion clearly characterised by a beneficial anti-reductionism. The critic runs like a main thread through the entire work. The author opens up for a meaningful and continuous study of other animals' Umwelt where he wants that the research, as far as it is possible, should be carried out on the animal's own terms. Martinelli does from this perspective, strongly criticise C.L. Morgan and his famous reductionist "canon". It reads:

"In no case should actions or behaviours be interpreted as the result of a superior psychic faculty, when it is possible to interpret them as a result of an inferior faculty."

Dario's antireductionistic argument against the Morgan's Canon has by other zoo-semioticians been baptised "Martinelli's Canon" and reads:

"In no case should actions or behaviours be interpreted as a result of an inferior psychic faculty, when it is possible to interpret them as a result of a superior faculty."

The historical background of the "Morgan's Canon" leads back to Germany in 1905-1907 and is related to the famous phenomenon of " Der kluge Hans ", a horse who was said to have mathematical abilities. The horse and his trainer, Orlov Trotter, brought about a series of

performances in Germany around the turn of the century where the horse used his hoof to scratch the right answer on the ground.(no.64).But, when the biologist and psychologist Oscar Pfungst's disclosed the case "Der Kluge Hans" in 1907, the air let instantly out of the balloon. The horse didn't understand even the simplest calculations. Dario Martinelli turns this conclusion on it's head: "Der Kluge Hans" was - on the contrary to man - able to read and interpret the 'invisible' small bodily signs and gestures of his trainer and other humans as easily as we can solve 2 + 3 = 5. ( Two times three equals five ).Soon the framework for the ongoing exploration of animal cognition was reorganised so that in future studies, scientists could rule out any form of "Clever Hans effect". Sterile, technically fabricated laboratory research was one of the results in the wake of "Der Kluge Hans". Animal behaviour was understood as j u s t "instinctive" without any cognition. The theory of instincts was almost supreme in more than 50 years and is still very prevalent. "Instincts" function mostly like a "black box" in which positivist researchers could place all inexplicable findings and put the label of "just instinct" on them. All scientific procedures became standardized and impersonalised in additional behavioral experiments with animals.

In his book Dario Martinelli has a very thorough and meaningful review of the terms "mimicry"(no.22,28,46),"deception" and "play" (no.4,11,12,13,14,42) which form his theory of "aesthetics".(no.22)After reading Martinelli's review of animal behaviour and communication, one will have a better understanding of how extraordinarily complex the communicative systems are composed. Take for example something as "innocent" as cats (no.7) or dogs playing with each other. When two dogs meet, and want to play rather than fight each other, they exchange a series of different gestures. Together these gestures signal to the other that now it is just a "fighting play" that should go on. (no.12,43). One of the dogs performs for example the well-known species-specific gesture for "play" by bending the head and body down, stretching his paws forward while barking eagerly and simultaneously turns his head quickly back and forth from side to side. If the other dog responds with the same type of gestures, the game suddenly is going on. (no.11,12,13).During the play session the play is maintained "playful" and as "play" by constantly repeating the specific, different signs indicating what the relationship should be. Martinelli's detailed review of these four mentioned concepts, "mimicry" (no.28,52,53), "deception", "play" and "aesthetics", builds, as previously mentioned, up gradually to an overall surprising, but very interesting aesthetic-philosophical idea: "Art" and aesthetics can be understood to have an evolutionary path that starts with the ability of the individual animal species to perform mimicry, deseption and lie. (no.22)These properties depend not only on the ability to communicate on one level, but involve simultaneously the will to meta-communication on another. That indicates that the playful dogs at the same time have to distinguish between, and simultaneously connect, two different cognitive levels with each other. On one level the dogs' barking suggests that this might be about an impending fight. On the meta level however the message in the relationship is modified to only mean "I just want to play".

We know and recognize this kind of meta-communication every time we make use of our analogical thinking. (no.69,70,74).An "analogy" says that something -at the same time - both is, and is not .The poetic metaphors are based on this basic logical pattern of double statement .Shakespeare's metaphor " Life is but a shadow , a poor player on the stage ... " draws, at the same time, a parallel between human life in general and life as a shadow play on a theater stage ; - life is, and is not what it is described as. (no.68).Let us again look to the semiosis of dogs play. The dogs' bodily gestures, such as head bowed and eager movements back and forth in play, are therefore to be interpreted as a metaphorical response and comment to the first utterance and function as explanatory context to the first bark utterance , - the bodily signs are perceived as a correction in the direction of pursuing the further play behavior. These steps in animal development of meta-thinking (no.48) therefore point towards the human aesthetic and artistic expression."Aesthetics" is considered by most of us first and foremost to be a mere human expression. However, there is clear evidence from a number of animal species which all together testify that man must share this aesthetical ability along with them!(no.4,14,22,28,29,31,52,53,54,55,56,68). It is worth noting that the origin of the notion "aesthetics", has an etymological basis as "perception" and belongs to our bodily sensing qualities.(no.72). So, - the next step in animal development pointing towards the human artistic expression is consequently the show of play by countless animal species. The play of animals can take place both intra - as inter-specific.

Martinelli is in this respect referring especially to my favourite Karl von Frisch who in "Animal Architecture", 1978) points out the obvious signs of aesthetic dimensions that we can observe and recognise in the actions of the bower bird.These male birds build complex structures of twigs, leaves and flowers that serve as shelter or recess or cottage for mating game. (no.28,29)/( Mating game: no.4,14,15).Every male bird is very resourceful in terms of building up its construction and then decorate it with 'all the world's delights': Stones, shiny shards of glass, beautiful floral and foliage, all in an effort to attract the female's attention and interest.Frequently the male bird breaks off a small branch and then bits at the end of the twig so that the splitting can serve as a form of a paint brush. Then the male bower bird crushes with its beak the berries which he has picked in the woods, all shining in different shades of blue and paints the entrance of the bower with the most beautiful nuance of blue with his 'brush'. The blue colour of the entrance looks very similar to the nuance of the plumage of the male bower bird, so the choice of the colour is not random. When the male now and then discovers withered flowers on the construction, it picks out the withered immediately and replace them with fresh new ones.Frisch has often observed how the birds can step a little back or aside to consider their creation of appropriate distance. Carl von Frisch also found that the bowerbirds put rocks in the shape of a path. These rocks decorate the entrance systematically in such a way that the largest stones are placed farthest from the entrance, and the smallest closest so that the female bird can get the illusion of watching a track, where her perspective leads right into the male's 'paradise'!

Martinelli also draws attention to the complicated question if it is just man, and man alone that can be said to 'have' a language. Many bio- and zoo-semioticians will reserve language ability to be applied to homo sapiens alone. The aforementioned John Deely represents such a position, and he is representative of many philosophers and scientists in bio- and zoosemiotics itself. Perhaps the most influential thinker in the 21st-century is the German fundamental ontologist Martin Heidegger. Throughout his philosophical work he is strongly convinced that it is only man, and man alone, who "has" a "language" and thereby can be said to 'have' an "Umwelt". "Animals are poor in world". This opinion is so widespread and universal in philosophy, biology, ethology and zoology, that one could easily be tempted to not wanting to venture into the field at all. Dario Martinelli dares without much reluctance to challenge this anthropocentric notion. He has many good arguments for his claim that several animal species have shown clear signs of linguistic abilities that, in principle, are not totally different from the human being. (no.6,24,32,37,38,39,44,45,46,50,51).Birds are found to have "dialects" when they sing, and depending on where they are located, they are able at any time to change their song mode so that they can communicate with their own anywhere. Bird songs must be learned and practiced before eventually being perfected.(no.49).Several bird species demonstrate a rich variety of bird songs. They can imitate other species so lifelike, that they are fooled into thinking the song is one of their own kind.(28,52,53,54,55,56). Birds that have adapted to more urban areas , turn out to change the pitch either up or down relative to the surroundings they belong to.Thus urbanized bird songs and communications can brake through various "sound barriers" of noise from traffic and other hubbub in the cities. And domesticated birds such as starlings can learn to whistle long frequencies of anthropogenic music that has been previously played for them.(no.52,53).One of the most astounding examples of birdsong imitation is documented to take place by the famous Lyre Bird.(no.54,55,56). This bird is known to mimic almost any types of sounds that occur in its environment. Its mimicry can involve the singing of other bird species or the sound of a chainsaw, car alarms or cameras that create unmistakable mechanical sounds when zooming and the "iris" closes with a distinctive "click." (no.28).It is also shown that birds are titling each other with their own proper names, exactly the same as dolphins do. (no.39,49).Martinelli refers to many similar examples of language actions in animals, examples indicating that animals may have linguistic abilities. (no.16,24,32,39,45,49,50).

Until I read "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics" I was strongly inclined to reserve man alone the "right" to use the language as a media for communication and modelling system for our thinking. Now I'm far more open to Martinelli's convincing arguments.Examples he points out, all indicate that there actually can exist linguistic abilities in other species than ourselves, examples which one can justify to denote with the term "language." I have personally been very intrigued by Irene Pepperberg's 30-year long study of "Alex", one Gray parrot who now sadly died some years ago. Alex could spend far more than 150 words.

He had learned concepts and demonstrated rational mind where he could differentiate between types of matter and fabric and he could operate with 7 different colours and five different shapes. (no.24). Alex distinguished between size and number of figures which he presented to the experiments with Pepperberg. Alex has also demonstrated that he understood abstract concepts like "bigger", "same", "smaller" and "different". Additionally Alex could distinguish between prepositions like "over" and "under." The most amazing thing was that Irene Pepperberg had managed to train Alex to speak American so she could pursue a sort of direct 'conversation' with Alex in many different ways. (no.24). Martinelli mentions of course Alex as one of several ethological language studies on different animal species. He is especially interested in the chimpanzee Washoe and the gorilla Koko who were both trained to use ASL (American Sign Language). (no.2,23,38,51).Washoe could after long and patient training demonstrate astonishing linguistic abilities and major cognitive systems, - capabilities, that without much doubt have revealed chimps as possible language animals. Thy are able to express joy, sorrow and care that have striking similarities with human expressions. (no.2,23,30,37,38,57).They also demonstrated that they have great abilities to lie and deceive others, and they show clear signs of having a 'theory of mind'.Washoe has also demonstrated his ability to make use of the ASL-language as a cognitive model for thinking in such a way, that he could form completely innovative words and concepts using their metaphorical use of language. (no.68,69,70,72).Washoe, already familiar with ASL words for "water" and "bird", spontaneously could combine and form a new term for an animal he had not yet learned the name of. Once Washoe noticed a white swan on the water, he was asked by his couch what he was looking at. He spontaneously signalled "water bird" using his sign language! A ring Washoe noticed he could immediately name as "a finger bracelet". He had not yet learned the word for "ring", but combined spontaneously two well-known concepts "finger" and "bracelet" to form a new metaphorical term. To this observation Dario Martinelli comments:

"This is rather a convincing proof that language is used precisely as a modeling system, other than a mere communication device".

A similar famous example of linguistic behaviour Martinelli clearly shows by the female gorilla "Koko". She is also trained in ASL. One day Koko and her trainer Penny Patterson were sitting together, the coach asked Koko if she wanted something to drink. She would. When Patterson asked her what body part she used to drink with, there was a strange session taking place. Koko looked for a moment thoughtfully at her trainer before she ostentatiously pointed to her eye. After receiving laughter from Patterson, Koko then pointed on her nose, then the ear, before she made a strange "grin" pointing to her mouth and satisfied took the bottle to her mouth to start drinking. The author sees the example as a wonderful illustration of "Monkey humour".

For Martinelli these illustrating observations show that both chimpanzee and gorilla can use language as a model for thinking. All these above mentioned species also prove to be able to score highly on the "mirror test". This is a test that can demonstrate whether the animals (including humans) have an opinion of himself as a "self". (no.1,35,36,40). High rate on these mirror tests provides a basis for looking at these species as acting subjects and personalities, not totally different from us humans, Martinelli claims. Dolphins and whales score by the way significant on mirror tests, and both species have a very complex and diverse communication pattern which suggests that they address each other with their own unique personal names. (no.39). The same qualities appear also in some bird species. (no.49).Several animal species, including corvid birds, score equally significant in the mirror tests.Ethologists claim that dolphins and corvids are just as much gifted as chimpanzees what cognitive abilities are concerned. (no.71).If we for a while turn our attention away from birds and mammals and focus on the social Umwelten of insects, cognitive ethology reveals in different species a series of complex communication patterns taking place between the members of the group. The Nobel Prize winner in ethology (1973), the early mentioned Karl von Frisch, received his award for his lifelong study of honey bee communication. It is worth noting that he as early as in the 1920s describes the complex "wagging tail communication" among the dancing bees as "symbolic language ". (no.16,44,45).One of the latest research on wasps in cognitive ethology also shows that some wasp species are highly skilled to recognize the individual faces of their own species, and they can also recognize some people's personal facial features, especially of course the bee/wasp keeper.(no.50,78).If we will follow the call we have found in "Martinelli's Canon", it is perhaps appropriate to ask ourselves to stay open to further exploration of the linguistic competences of animals.Martinelli has with his outstanding book opened up an exciting alternative view of language which currently doesn't seem to be generally accepted.

In the final part of his book Martinelli raises the important question of whether zoosemiotics should move into the ethics and morality area or not. Is it even possible to stick to a purely descriptive account in the study of human and other animal behaviour, communication and interaction, without having an ethical perspective on what we are observing and doing? [see note 2)].

Before I come to an end in my speech, I want to highlight the conclusion of Martinelli's final chapter of ethics and morality. His view has an explicit echo philosophical character where he enters into the important discussion about whether nature can also be said to have "intrinsic values". He delves into the ongoing conflict which consists in ethics and eco-philosophy between wanting to prioritize the anthropocentric values versus a biocentric point of view. It is enlightening and very pleasing to follow Martinelli's critical revision of the denigrated anthropocentrism and see his own priorities. They go in the direction of wanting to maintain what the author labels a "critical

anthropocentrism" in zoosemiotic studies, combined with a bio-centrism and its pursuit of environmental ethical issues. I understand Dario Martinelli's choice of perspective as an important ethical choice.There are several voices in eco-philosophy and eco ethics nowadays that in their eagerness to avoid anthropocentrism, "rinse the baby out with the bath water". I think James Lovelock's point of view in his latest "Gaia's Revenge" is one famous example.(no.21). What really bothers me with Lovelock's latest view is that he has chosen a unilateral biocentric perspective on the state of affairs. Based on his perspective Lovelock is choosing the prioritising of nature and Gaia above man and the human potential future.As I read and understand "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics" Martinelli is fortunately on a completely different planet than James Lovelock. Instead of talking about the mythical "Gaia", he chooses to stick to the concrete, vibrant animal life on Earth. Dario Martinelli has written a book permeated by a deep love and respect for all life. He expresses at the same time both the scientist's and the philosopher's critical wonder and combines the candour of man and his ability to express empathy, love and wisdom in his research on life and the living. It is this kind of "humanistic perspective" I find as a clue in Martinelli's scientific work. With the release of "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics" the author has brilliantly placed terrain open for further research and wonder in the common juxtaposition of nature and culture. ***APPENDIX:[Notes,(I),Literature,(II),and YouTube Videos,(III)]

(I)

(Note 1)

One can of course always ask critical questions to the statement 'of an ongoing revolution'.Our prevailing altogether reductionist view of animal aptitude occurred in the West with René Descartes and the emergence of modern sciences in the forthcoming epoch in the 17th Century. Seen in this historical perspective, there has been a kind of revolution going on in the last 40 years with the rise of cognitive ethology and zoosemiotics in the mid 60s.However, - when viewed in a longer historical context, I think it's interesting to notice how previous perceptions of certain animals can be said to have anticipated our modern, cognitive knowledge of the corvids and the fact that many different birds have song dialects which they have to learn and practice before they are able to perform properly. [See Pliny the Elder:From "Historia Naturalis", (77 AD) Book X,The Natural History of Birds, CHAP. XXIX].About one year ago I noticed that one of the latest conducted cognitive experiments on corvids could be traced directly back to Aesop's Fables, more specific to the fable "The Crow and the Pitcher". (no.71,74)Aesop was a Phrygian slave on Samos. He lived from about 620 BCE to 564 BCE.In short, the fable is a story about a thirsty crow which stumbled across a jar with water. Not able to reach the water surface of the pitcher, the crow suddenly started to throw small stones in

the jar, causing the water level to raise so the thirsty crow in the end was able to drink water from the surface of the pitcher with its beak.The moral of the fable is: "Necessity is the mother of invention". [See http://youtu.be/T4zcIBqgXrc andhttp://youtu.be/XtnG37texEI].In the 1st century there lived in Rome a famous scholar, known as "Pliny the Elder" (25 AD-79 AD). His main work is called 'Historia Naturalis' (77 AD) and was the first major precursor for subsequent encyclopedias. "Historia Naturalis" is a collection of contemporary ideas from all cultural fields and presents also the knowledge of nature, minerals, plants and animals, etc. Pliny describes, inter alia, in depth the birds singing abilities and how they have to be learned by practice. He tells about dialects among bird species and their singing qualities, and he is fascinated about the fact that corvids and parrots can learn to talk. In one chapter Pliny tells how it is observed crows which have been drinking water from jars by putting stones into the pitcher to raise the water to the appropriate height.

Now it turns out that one of the latest, specific experiments on the cognitive abilities of corvids in fact are totally inspired, planned and executed in line with Aesop's fable "The Crow and the Pitcher" and following Pliny the Elder's descriptions! An incredible amazing story that tells us quite a lot of past human understanding and the unbiased openness to animal's talents which later seems to have disappeared with the Western emergence of modern experimental science, until now.

(note 2)

The very last chapter in Dario Martinelli's "A Critical Companion) doesn't quite cope with the rest of the book. I have among other things some trouble following the author's diligent use of Francis Bacon's famous concepts, called 'idola mentis'. Martinelli uses Bacon's well-known concepts "idola trebis", "idola specus", "idola agora" and "idola theatri" as atheoretical zoosemiotic categorisation and mapping of various human prejudices as they show up in our cultural perceptions of people, animals, ethics and morality. Martinelli's use of 'heavy' graphic shapes in the last section of his book seems almost to be bordering on the absurd, especially considering the fact that Francis Bacon in modern eco-philosophy is known as a manipulative person with a very hostile view of women and nature. Francis Bacon among others supported the Inquisition to force the "truth" out of the female "witches" during the church's interrogation. It is also Bacon who is well known for using a variety of metaphors he has chosen directly from the Inquisition torture on people. He describes inbound how the new, modern sciences, using the inductive method, should 'squeeze' the truth out of the mountains ores and the natural hidden 'female' cavities, for the benefit of mankind. Paradise is for Bacon no longer to be searched for in a world hereafter. "Utopia" is already lying hidden in front of our feet. The tasks of the natural sciences are to uncover the secrets of nature. With the aid of our growing knowledge in the natural sciences humanity would in the near future force "mother nature" to her knees.I find it somewhat strange that Martinelli doesn't also choose simultaneously to make the reader aware of this side of Francis Bacon's philosophy when the author puts such emphasis on

applying Bacon's famous 'Idola mentis' in his zoosemiotical analysis. Fortunately this is my only serious, critical comment on a book, which for me has already meant more than most I've read in recent years.

(II) Literature:

Dario Martinelli: "A Critical Companion to Zoosemiotics", 2010.Timo Maran, Dario Martinelli, Alexei Turovski: "Readings In Zoosemiotics", (2011).Charles Darwin:"The expression of the emotions in man and animals", 1872.Lacoff & Johnson: "Philosphy in the Flesh", 1999. Lacoff & Johnson: "Metaphores We Live By", 1980.Jacob von Uexküll: "Strolls Through The Worlds Of Animals And Men", 1934.Jesper Hoffmeyer: "Samfundets naturhistorie",("The Natural History of Society"), 1982.Jesper Hoffmeyer: "Naturen i hovedet", ("Nature In The Head"), 1984.Jesper Hoffmeyer: "Biosemiotics. An Examination into the Signs of Life and the Life of Signs", University of Scranton Press, Scranton PA, USA, 2008.Marian Stamp Dawkins: "Through our eyes Only",1993.Gregory Bateson: "Steps to an Ecology of Mind", 1972.Gregory Bateson: "Mind and Nature: A necessary Unity", 1979.Gregory Bateson and Mary Cathrine Bateson: "Angel's Fear: Towards An Epistemology Of The Sacred", 1986.Gregory Bateson: "What is a meta for?" From "Metalog, "Steps..,1972.Gregory Bateson: "What is an instinct?" From "Metalog", "Steps...",1972.Mary Catherine Bateson: "Our own metaphor",1972.Carl Gustav Jung, Anelia Jaffe: "Mitt Liv" ("Memories, Dreams, Reflections"), 2007, og "Syv Samtaler Med De Døde"("Septem Sermones ad Mortuos"/" The Seven Sermons to The Dead"),1916.Karl von Frisch: "Animal Architecture", 1973Karl von Frisch: "Decoding the Language of the Bee", Nobel Lectures, Physiology or Medicine, 1973/1992James L. Gould & Carol Grant Gould: "Animal Architects: Building and the Evolution of Intelligence", 2012.Brett Buchannon:"Onto-Ethologies. The Animal Environments of Uexküll, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and Deleuze", 2008.Irene Pepperberg: "Alex & Me: How a Scientist and a Parrot Discovered a Hidden World of Animal Intelligence--and Formed a Deep Bond in the Process", 2009.Aesop's Fables: "The Crow and the Pitcher" (see link no.71).Pliny the Elder:(23-79 AD) "Naturalis Histora","Natural History", 77 AD.Franz de Waal: "Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals", 1996.Franz de Waal: "The Bonoboe and the Atheist: In Search of Humanism Among the Primates", 2013.Virginia Morell: "Animal Wise: The Thoughts and Emotion of Our Fellow Creatures", 2013.

Marc Bekoff: "The Emotional Lives of Animals", 2008James Lovelock: "The Revenge of Gaia: Earth's Climate Crisis & The Fate of Humanity", 2007.Donald R. Griffin: "Animal Thinking", 1984Hallyn, F: "Metaphors and Analogy in the Sciences", (2000)Brian Handwerk:"Wasps Can Recognize Faces"(December 2,2011, National Geographic.(See link 78)

(III) YouTube Videos:

[My recommendations, marked (no), are everyone and all of them brilliant illustrations to my main subject that is discussed and described with several topics in my essay].

1)http://youtube.com/watch?v=cTP01Wbsh0E:Self recognition...Mirror test

2)http://youtube.com/watch?v=CQCOHUXmEZg:Koko the gorilla cries over the loss of a kitten.

3)http://youtube.com/watch?v=QMFqV4SJLWg:Nautilus -David Attenborough (example of "Umwelt")

4)http://youtube.com/watch?v=L54bxmZy_NE:Astounding mating dance birds of Paradise.

5)http://youtube.com/watch?v=cpgCQj-sgqk:Crowe intelligence.

6)http://youtu.be/WabT1L-nN-E:Whale song.

7)http://youtu.be/goKrh5DYOJc:How to understand your cat's body language and mood.

8)http://youtu.be/41Z6Mvjd9w0:Crow using 3 tools in a sequence correctly.

9)http://youtu.be/TtmLVP0HvDg:Tool-making crows.

10)http://youtu.be/onA2ve3EDWk:Smart birds..Crows.

11)http://youtu.be/Jf3Tzx1ooIM:Dog play initiation.

12)http://youtu.be/PWa9T8WuvKU:Perfect play bow... Dogs playing gestures.

13)http://youtu.be/oH4G4VvYeKk:The many ways dogs initiate play.

14)http://youtu.be/o42C6ajjqWg:World's weirdest - birds "moonwalk" to impress the ladies...Bird-dances.

15)http://youtu.be/1Sj-UdjqlFw:Magnificent Riflebird...Bird song and dances.

16)http://youtu.be/bFDGPgXtK-U:The waggle dance of the honeybee.

17)http://youtu.be/XuDiJ9YAUtQ:Charles Sanders Peirce(1839-1914)...A short introduction.

18)http://youtu.be/d12sdYJw-Ww:Socialization:George Herbert Mead Social Self...A short introduction.

19)http://youtu.be/prFU6SJt1T4

:George Herbert Mead -Symbolisher Interactionismus...mit Hunden... ( Just a joke, but the video shows how relevant G.H.Mead's interaction theory and his theory of 'significant sign gesture'are for zoosemiotic studies.

20)http://youtu.be/eqLVYMUowPI:George Herbert Mead's Stages of Self...His theory of significant sign gestures.

21)http://youtu.be/sRQ-NqaYFzs:Doomsday Pending? James Lovelock on The Hour.

22)http://youtu.be/CJIUNNssSVg:My love bird does not like her short tail...Bird's aesthetics.

23)http://youtu.be/SNuZ4OE6vCk:A conversation with Koko (and trainer Penny Patterson).

24)http://youtu.be/ldYkFdu5FJk:Alex The Parrot...Animal language studies by Irene Pepperberg.

25)http://youtu.be/URZ_EciujrE:How smart is a crow? (compare this link with the chimpanzee gestalt experiments and cognitive abilities by Wolfgang Köhler).

26)http://youtu.be/d5wFMqeTun8:Amazing raven intelligence test...(compare Aesop's Fables and Pliny the elder "Naturalis Historia",(77 AD)

27)http://youtu.be/riqtFvZg1mI:Rook uses stones to raise water level and get food.(compare Aesop's Fables and Pliny The Elder "Naturalis Historia").

28)http://youtu.be/GPbWJPsBPdA:David Attenborough - Animal behaviour of the Australien bowerbird...Mimicry and bird songs.

29)

http://youtu.be/0sFwLi2B1nw:Vogel Bower Bird.

30)http://youtu.be/eTUIfHyHQRs:Orangutan saves baby chick from drowning!...(Emotions, empathy and a 'theory of mind'?)

31)http://youtu.be/AcDefAe6wp4:Mysterious underwater crop circles discovered off the coast Japan...( Artforms in nature??)

32)http://youtu.be/jz3sQsTE5tA:The language of dolphins.

33)http://youtu.be/7GUJOIM7KUk:Carl Gustav Jung - the power of imagination...

34)http://youtu.be/7hOMAGEB7Ko:"An Ecology Of Mind"...A film portrait of Gregory Bateson by Nora Bateson.

35)http://youtu.be/vJFo3trMuD8:Self-Recognition in Apes...Mirror test.

36)http://youtu.be/HRVGA9zxXzk:Mirror test shows magpies aren't so bird-brained...

37)http://youtu.be/F_Al42rzDFo:Koko makes new kitten her baby for now.

38)http://youtu.be/B5tsSyrTy0g:Koko answers "Where does the baby drink?"

39)http://youtu.be/ycRaQvhwrvs:Dolphins give each other unique names.

40)

http://youtu.be/YBYU1eayaXs:Dolphins see themselves in a mirror...Mirror tests.

41)http://youtu.be/ZnqUAsyOTv4:New Caledonian crows reason about hidden humans.

42)http://youtu.be/tUBMSnHH7hc:Crows playing with snow(snowboarding crow).

43)http://youtu.be/HOiAwIxpt1c:Dog play techniques Dog Body Language.

44)http://youtu.be/Vaszh2bY3mc:Interpreting the language of bees.

45)http://youtu.be/TiyKK4YiRAs:What do bee say to other bees?

46)http://youtu.be/PgEmSb0cKBg:Whistled language of the island of La Gomera(Canary Islands), the Silbo Gomero. ( That birds can mimicry human whistling is well known, - here is an example of the other way around).

47)http://youtu.be/Zi3jdLY0T7Q:Spiky Sight - Sea Urchins use whole body as eye... (compare 'Umwelt', Jacob Von Uexküll).

48)http://youtu.be/nIwsNvCkhrk:Russell's Crows...Metatool use.

49)https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ed9A4HPdXgQ:How a parrot learns its name in the wild.

50)https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uSspVZGvycI:Wasps know each other's faces: Communication and Cognition in the Polistes.

51)http://youtube.com/watch?v=443bQO7_A9o:Sign language lessons: Common phrases: How to sign common animals in sign language.. ASL.

52)http://youtu.be/qDWNrKkqHdQ:Poppy the rescued bird whistling Dixie amazing! Starling singing whistles.

53)http://youtube.com/watch?v=stS3FsghlqY:Mozart Eine Kline Nachtmusik Bird-Poppy loves to whistle Mozart.

54)http://youtu.be/Q3Sga4MWeVw:Lyre bird song.

55)http://youtu.be/tXE6aUGb4zw:This bird can copy the song of everybody including- LyreBird.

56)http://youtu.be/sAwiFMKPHmY:Amazin bird can imitate any song - LyreBird.

57)http://youtube.com/watch?v=GcJxRqTs5nkMoral behavior in animals. Franz de Wahl.

58)http://youtube.com/watch?v=gTeLsEGPjdUThe cultured ape.

59)http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q5sXqk4j9jkDog RMI - Studying the dog brain.

60)http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ftr9yY-YuYUCan dogs tell the time?

61)http://youtube.com/watch?v=cEDEBtJwazAThe mysteries of the animal mind.

62)http://youtube.com/watch?v=AN6Ux6MoCIcThe nature of things -the mysteries of the animal mind.

63)http://youtube.com/watch?v=21UIZk5xh90Animal mind. Problem solving(compare W. Köhler).

64)http://youtube.com/watch?v=w8izEMs7eyoKluger Hans. Intro film.

65)http://youtube.com/watch?v=vfI5-RWC-QQNature. A murder of crows.

66)http://youtube.com/watch?v=KTsGtTeVEAIInterview with Nora Bateson.

67)http://youtube.com/watch?v=aRgCbcY7fLITerritories of the alive - Reflecting on the ideas of Gregory Bateson.

68)http://youtube.com/watch?v=Eu-9rpJITY8George Lacoff on how he started his work on conceptual metaphor.

69)http://youtube.com/watch?v=jHBWZDVMVqASimiles and metaphors.

70)http://youtube.com/watch?v=JREImH2Ar70What is metaphor?

71)http://youtube.com/watch?v=FrZWNMvWjTEAesop' fables. The crow and the pitcher.

72)http://youtube.com/watch?v=HaMeGdrKnEEThe meaning of the body. Aesthetics of human understanding.

73)http://youtube.com/watch?v=xv-ETRz3YiQEducation book Revue: Metaphors we live by, by George Lacoff and Mark Johnson.

74)

http://youtu.be/T4zcIBqgXrc &http://youtu.be/XtnG37texEI: The Crow and the Pitcher. From "Aesop's Fables".

75)http://youtube.com/watch?v=50JFrGzXGoIInternational Congress of Numanities. ICoN.

76)http://youtube.com/watch?v=1QySq5OZC5gInternational Congress of Numanities. ICoN

77)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4JRgiwPqwnMWashoe, the chimpanzee and trainer Gardner.

78)http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/11/111202-wasps-people-faces-recognition-insects-science-animals/) An Article/link.----79)http://youtube.com/watch?v=U9pg6z2MFDwCC G. Andersen: "Hemingway: Mennesket og dyrene i romanen 'Den gamle mannen og havet'. - Et Humanistiskmanifest?"./"A zoosemiotic analysis of man and animals in Hemingway's novel 'The Old Man and the Sea'. - A humanistic manifest?".